#it's us that's the problem

[marisatomay]

[skriveting]

[eddiemunsongf]

you mean to tell me theres no epilogue where laura’s a mysterious travelling big game veterinarian/cryptid hunter with one eye and max is her infinitely loyal wise-cracking malewife who turns into a hulking monster once a month? 

[skin-slave]

Grooming is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them.

Grooming Can Look Like:

1. "Is that your real name? I don't really like to call people by their usernames."

Asking for personal information right away - It gives a false sense of intimacy and can be used later to threaten or blackmail.

2. "I see you like Band. My parents hate them. 😂 Do your parents know your music tastes?"

Segueing quickly into private life, sometimes asking invasive questions about home, friends, family, etc - It tells them whether or not a person is isolated, unhappy, self-destructive, unsupervised, etc. The more vulnerable a person is, the more successful grooming can be.

3. "I like your fan art. Do you do nsfw? Nothing crazy, just flirty..."

Bringing up sexuality or other adult subjects in a general way - It pushes the person's boundaries gently, getting them to talk about nsfw things in a way that feels nonthreatening.

4. "That post made a good point. I would never guess you're 14. You're really mature and well-spoken."

Describing the person as mature, smart, wise, resourceful, street-smart, etc - It's flattering, and it gives the illusion of equality and respect in their interactions.

5. "People hate what they don't understand. You're just so unique. I get it."

Reinforcing that the person is unique, misunderstood, above others, etc - It increases isolation and forms a sense of dependance on the groomer.

6. "Omg look at this guy's outfit! It's so hot! You know, you could totally rock something like this!"

Sexualizing the person in flattering ways - It feels like a compliment and edges farther past typical boundaries, normalizing more and more sexual interactions.

7. "That guy was out of line. 😤 I couldn't help it, I messaged him and told him if he doesn't leave you alone I'll doxx him. He won't be back. He knows I'll do it. Please don't be mad, I just hate when people mess with my friends... "

Defending the person, often inappropriately - It's a show of devotion to the person, a display of the potential for aggression that serves to nudge boundaries, and can be used to threaten or coerce later.

8. "I'm totally with you on Ship X. It's so bigoted to break up Ship Y like that. We ought to try to get those freaks banned."

Creating an other to unify against, often inappropriately - It creates a sense of intimacy and serves as a way to push boundaries by encouraging inappropriate behavior.

9. "Idk why you let her waste ur time. U don't need phoneys like that. You have me!!! 😂"

Discouraging competing relationships - It increases isolation, vulnerability and dependence.

10. "Listen, don't worry about your phone bill. I got it. Sent it thru your Kofi, plus a little extra. You deserve it."

Giving gifts, money, or paying bills - It creates a sense of intimacy, and possibly financial dependence. And it can be used as a source of guilt.

11. "Where are you??? Tell whoever you're with that I miss my bff!!!!!"

Checking in, keeping tabs, tracking or asking for updates - It diverts the person's attention onto the groomer, interrupts their social life to further isolate, and creates a pattern of guilt and responsibility for the groomer's feelings.

12. "I can't believe you'd abandon me like this. You know I have depression. Are you trying to make me suicidal? The least you could do is give me a couple weeks to find a new therapist. I'm gonna need one now."

Threatening to harm themselves, or implying that they might if contact ends - It plays on that sense of guilt and responsibility and can be used long after abuse has happened, to prevent disclosure.

Grooming doesn't happen by accident. By definition, it's deliberate. When someone begins grooming, they have already decided to abuse. From that point on, interaction has one goal. It creates a situation where the person being targeted has conflicting emotions about what's happening, no one they trust to give advice, and no way to break out without being the bad guy.

The setup - the grooming behaviors themselves - vary. One abuser might use many approaches, and might even change methods if a target isn't receptive. I think we can all agree that guilt-tripping and displays of aggression aren't healthy under any circumstances, but many common behaviors are things that can happen outside of grooming, in other contexts, and be ok. (An old friend might give generous gifts purely out of friendship, but someone who's practically a stranger, giving generous gifts, acting like an old friend, is potentially predatory.) That's why it can be so hard to see. We can't simply ban their tools or latch onto keywords. There are no elements that are always present. There's no set pattern. There are few flags that are always red. It's not that simple.

The only reliable and realistic way to keep vulnerable ppl safe is to teach them to recognize potential grooming by looking at the entirety of the situation, to trust their feelings, and to speak up.

[uncharted-constellations]

I only have time for a quick doodle cuz finals stuff but i can absolutely see these kids fake crying on television and giving out gabes phone number to fuck with him, I absolutely can

[astriiformes]

undefined

bad_day.mp3

(Audio taken from this tumblr post)

[cheeseanonioncrisps]

I unironically love the character names in the Hunger Games series.

Haymitch, Peeta, Hazelle, Leevy, Maysilee, Finnick and Greasy Sae look bizarre when you first see them written down, but then if you think about how they look and/or sound it's pretty clear that they're meant to be modern names, only modern names that have changed spelling and pronounciation over time— as you would have expected them to have done so over how ever many hundreds of years it's been since our modern day.

(Remember, though The Hunger Games themselves have only been going on for 75 years, the universe they're in is canonically post-apocalyptic— the reason nobody ever mentions what's happening in the rest of the world is that everywhere except America was destroyed in a nuclear war. We're not given much of an indication how long it's been since then.)

Peeta is Peter, Haymitch is Hamish, and Hazelle is Hazel, Maysilee is Maisie— the changes in pronunciation are slight (Peeta and Peter are already virtually identical in my accent), and the spelling has changed to match.

Leevy is either a corruption of Lily, or more likely I suspect 'Livvy', a common nickname for Olivia; Finnick is probably from Finnegan (shorten in to 'Finneg' and then say it over and over very fast); Sae could be short for Sarah, or Sally or even Susan— it's not uncommon for nicknames to become real names in their own right (look at Harry or Molly as examples).

I also love the trend of having District 1 parents give their kids names relating to the luxury items their district produces— Glimmer, Marvel, Gloss, Cashmere, Velvereen (presumably a corruption of 'velveteen'), Facet— because those things are all a) objectively pretty/nice (like naming a kid 'Diamond' or 'Star' today) and presumably status symbols in their district.

Meanwhile District 3 does the same thing, but all the pronunciations are corrupted. You've got technical names to do with the manufacture of electronics— Wiress (wireless), Circ (circuit)— but you've also got what I'm pretty sure are meant to be corruptions of modern brand names— Beetee (BT), Teslee (Tesla).

To me this kind of suggests that District 3 is less conscious of this influence than District 1. Like, parents in 1 are more likely to deliberately think "I'll name my kid Glimmer, because things that glimmer are pretty" whereas 3 as a culture might have genuinely forgotten that those names used to mean something, in the same way that most of us don't think much about how the name 'Arthur' comes from the old word for 'Bear'.

And of course, then you've got the Capitol leaning hard into those ancient Roman vibes with names like Fulvia, Plutarch, Seneca, Tigris… but still using the European/American personal name+family name format, which the Romans didn't really do. Like it's very clear that this is a future society fetishising the classical era, rather than an actual resurgence of Roman culture.

It's just such a cool world-building detail. So many dystopian novels just go for modern names (and there's nothing wrong with that, especially if you're only looking a couple of hundred years into the future) but thinking about how names might have evolved over the centuries and the different naming traditions that might have developed in different areas really adds a whole new dimension to the culture of Panem.

[catinfroghat]

Meanwhile on twitter there's a war raging against succession fans and bts fans because apparently using the phrase "poor little meow meow" about roman roy is appropriating from kpop stan accounts because they invented it 💀💀💀

[alliedn]

you know, like a liar

[djappleblush]

Fanfic authors be like "stay tuned for more" or "to be continued" and then don't update for twenty years, lmao.

[nightlyponder]

"the well off and rich arent the same"

listen i dont know why we're pretending classism is only 'billionaires vs everybody else' and how they are the only people who benefit from their wealth but im so tired of this. i mean it SHOULD be. but thats not how the "well off" operate. people need to focus this energy on getting the "well off" to align with the poor. Because they benefit from the poor's oppression too and they think they're closer to billionaires when they will never be.

poor people dont need to be "reminded" that children of wealthy families shouldn't feel guilty about their families' wealth. the children of the wealthy and well off need to be reminded that the poor are human beings who deserve not to be exploited and treated like subhuman. that the system made them poor and keeps them poor, not bad choices or bad decisions. there's no morality in being poor. they aren't bad people and shouldn't be judged based on how much labor they produce. the well off need to fuckin put in work to dismantle classism and fight against exploitation.

stop coddling the upper class from the lower class. stop scolding the poor like theyre children.

[rustchild]

controversial opinion about incredibly niche subjects, but i actually like the use of the universal ‘he’ in the narration of Left Hand of Darkness. I like it for the same reason that everyone hates it, and Ursula Le Guin herself regretted it: because it doesn’t fit.

The book is ostensibly written and translated by Genly, or by the observers that came to Gethen before him, and the central struggle of Genly’s story is his inability to give up the gendered frameworks he’s used to in the face of a situation where they don’t apply at all. Having that baked into the language indicates just how deep that struggle runs. In order for him to understand Gethen, to connect to Estraven--hell, to understand himself--he needs to give up on this idea of gender that is so fundamental to his cultural background that it’s baked into his language, and that’s just as much of a barrier to true connection as Estraven’s memories of Arek are to their use of mindspeech. Having that reflected in the text itself, and showing Genly struggle with it as he writes, is actually a super effective way to not only show this tension, but also draw further attention to the limits of Le Guin’s English-speaking audience.

[jellyfisharesatan]

Rlly loving the implication that Luther knew Diego was in a mental hospital this whole time and decided to just leave him there aksjhrhw

[biggest-gaudiest-patronuses]

less "people should have to pass a class before having children" and more "society should be providing free parenting classes to people who want to have kids, and offering meaningful incentives to get expectant parents to sign up."

[chucktaylorupset]

its been a million years.  percy has gone from young millenial to squarely gen z.  i think that while he’s up on that mountain demanding the gods pay their fucking child support, he should tell hera at the top of his sixteen year old pipsqueak lungs that polyamory is a thing now and she doesn’t have to define her marriage the traditional way if she doesn’t want to.  she’s the goddess of all marriages!  that includes these modern ones too!!

hera is like zeus would you agree to an open relationship zeus is like SOLD i have been trying to do this for years, completely neglects to read the fine print that this goes two ways before signing on the dotted line for this deal with the prada wearing devil because fundamentally, zeus is an asshole

hera starts hooking up with committed married couples and having SUPREMELY powerful demigod children.  they are all her favorites and she lavishes them with powers and gifts and attention.  she has, unlike the other gods, no millenia of experience with mortal children to temper her reaction, and so this whole move honestly causes more problems than not.

meanwhile hades and persephone; poeseidon and amphirite; dionysus and ariadne; all of them have been trying to talk to hera about this thing for DECADES and then perseus fucking protagonist powers jackson comes in and turns a quarter of a century into wasted work.

[grinningjackal]

We really need to disentangle whiteness from being trans because every day I see people on various social media sites telling trans people of color that we won't pass unless we perform gender the same way white people do and not only is it ignorant, but it's culturally violent.